Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Vantala Ramanna - Appellant
Versus
Director General CISF - Respondent
W.P.(C) 13279 of 2022
Decided On : 13-09-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for posting transfer (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. decision on representation promised (Para 5) |
| 3. court directs timely decision on representation (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. petitioner can challenge adverse decision (Para 8 , 9) |
CM APPL. 40261/2022 & CM APPL. 40262/2022(for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The applications are accordingly disposed of.
W.P.(C) 13279/2022 & CM APPL. 40260/2022 (for seeking interim ex-parte order)
3. Present petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents, DG CISF, New Delhi to post the petitioner at any CISF units of South Sector or within South Eastern Sector or Central Sector in terms of circular dated 25.09.2017. The petitioner further seeks direction to quash and set aside the orders dated 28.03.2022, 02.04.2022, 16.04.2022 and movement order dated 07.09.2022 wherein he has been transferred from the present unit of IGI Airport New Delhi to 9th Reserve Battallion, Deoli, Rajasthan and to direct respondent no.1 to pass a speaking order against the representation dated 31.07.2022.
4. For the aforesaid relief, the petitioner made a representation dated 31.07.2022, however, till date, the said representation has not been decided.
5. Mr. Abhigyan Siddhant, learned Counsel appearing on advance notice and on instructions, submits that the representation of the petitioner shall be decided within three weeks from today.
6. Accordingly, we hereby dispose of the present petition by directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 31.07.2022 within the time sought and further to transmit the said decision to the petitioner within one week thereafter.
7. Till then, movement order dated 07.09.2022 shall remain stayed.
8. In view of above, petition is disposed of alongwith the pending application.
9. Needless to state that if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision of the respondents, he may challenge the same before the appropriate forum.
Authorities must decide representations timely and fairly, adhering to principles of administrative justice.
The court emphasized the duty of authorities to decide pending representations in a timely manner, confirming jurisdiction to compel action under Article 226.
The court emphasized the importance of a reasoned order and specified a timeframe for communicating the decision on the petitioner's representation.
The court emphasized the importance of passing a reasoned order on the petitioner's representation and providing specific relief to the petitioner.
The court emphasized the importance of the respondents deciding the petitioner's representation and communicating the decision with a reasoned order, in line with the petitioner's request for retenti....
Timely decision on representations and communication of reasoned orders by the respondents.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making on representations made by petitioners.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making on the petitioner's representation and the stay of any movement order until the representation is decided.
The court emphasized the importance of the respondent deciding the petitioner's representation and communicating the decision with a reasoned order.
The court emphasized the importance of communication from the respondents and provided the petitioner with the option to challenge the decision if aggrieved.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
